Comments made by Alex_Grebenshchikov

gareDawg, I have always wondered the same thing about evangelical Atheists. If they really are certain there is no God, then why should they care to evangelize their beliefs? It seems the only logical end to a true atheistic worldview is to act completely in one's own self interest, with no concern for a greater good or helping others see there version of "truth". Anon11, "But, science is also constantly learning from itself. So to claim ultimate knowledge as an atheist is contradictory to the process of discovery that defines scientific progress." - good point here. I've always thought that all Atheists are actually agnostics, whether or not they want to admit it, because they can never be 100% certain that there is no God, yet they will talk as though it is in indisputable fact in the face of science. They can't even be 100% certain that we are not all just brains in a jar controlled by a mad scientist, or that the world wasn't created 5 minutes ago with all memories implanted and everything artificially aged. Science is awesome, but it is simply not equipped to handle every question in life from the metaphysical to the philosophical.SDforward, the funny thing about goodness is the question, goodness as measured against what absolute moral standard, and where does that absolute standard come from? Some say there is no absolute moral standard, or that actions in themselves are neither inherently right nor wrong, they are simply actions. But if you have never raped or murdered someone, I would ask why not? What if it wasn't illegal? Is it only wrong because our society says it's wrong, or is it absolutely wrong in any society, and where does that recognition that we "ought not" do something wrong come from?

Peking_Duck_SD, you may be on to something here. So the Asian community, for example, is not really a minority, correct? In 2005 (before the economy tanked), median Asian household wealth was greater than the median for white households, yet they account for about 5% of the U.S. population. How was the Asian community able to financially outperform whites, while other minorities were not? Well, having grown up around a lot of minorities myself, the answer is obvious - the Asian culture tends to push education, hard work and self reliance. This is the general mindset in most Asian families, and kids are simply more disciplined than average from a very early age. My Asian friends were generally not out partying; they were trying to get straight A's and plan for college. I can't blame one racial group in America for the lack of wealth or power of another racial group, I can only blame the individual who feels like a victim and refuses to acknowledge their own culpability. Thomas Sowell made this point when he wrote, "The very word "achievement" has been replaced by the word "privilege" in many writings of our times. Individuals or groups that have achieved more than others are called "privileged" individuals or groups, who are to be resented rather than emulated. The length to which this kind of thinking — or lack of thinking — can be carried was shown in a report on various ethnic groups in Toronto. It said that people of Japanese ancestry in that city were the most "privileged" group there, because they had the highest average income. What made this claim of "privilege" grotesque was a history of anti-Japanese discrimination in Canada, climaxed by people of Japanese ancestry being interned during World War II longer than Japanese Americans. If the concept of achievement threatens the prevailing ideology, the reality of achievement despite having obstacles to overcome is a deadly threat. That is why the achievements of Asians in general — and of people like the young black man with no arms — make those on the left uneasy. And why the achievements of people who created their own businesses have to be undermined by the President of the United States."

Imross, and then in that glorious year, when the majority (I assume you mean whites) becomes the minority, the new white minority should have every right to kick and scream for "equality" and fair treatment, and the white cause should be looked at as very noble since they will be the pitied underdog with no fair chance at making it. Maybe whites will even get some sort of affirmative action preferential treatment. Is that what whites should expect? Or perhaps, to really fix the majority vs minority mindset, race shouldn't be considered at all. Otherwise, we as a society will be trapped in an endless oscillation between who is, at any given time, considered a down-trodden minority. I suppose it's easier to blame-shift and attribute problems to racial oppression instead of lack of concern for education and lack of initiative and personal responsibility, which one can only blame themselves for.

Don't get me wrong though, I appreciate humility, and if Alvarez showing up in windbreaker and jeans was genuine and not staged to make himself appeal to the working man (like when Obama says, "uh" several times during a speech, violating the first no no of speech class 101), then I like that about him.

Roberto Rolando Salinas, whoa buddy, ay caramba, you sound a little paranoid that republicans, or maybe any non-Mexican politician is out to get Mexicans. I think when republicans support private industry, they are making a powerful statement that they support individual initiative over taking money from the hardworking, successful people and giving to the self-entitled, less hard working people in the form of handouts. When you write "Alvarez supports a government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Mr. Alvarez, 'Power To The People'", do you really mean "Power to La Raza" or "Power to the unions"? That is not a great chant of individualism and self reliance. I think what people like Alvarez really support is a people of the government, for the government, and by the government. Typical sentiment in this uneducated, socialistic, Obama era, but quite backwards from what made America the greatest country in the world (although that title may be soon to expire).

Kyla Calvert, I like the pun in the title :-) I think it is unfair to place this burden on the public school system. They have a hard enough time simply educating the kids, which is their primary responsibility. Now they are to be tasked with reducing obesity? This should be the parents' responsibility. What's next, schools will have to make sure kids have good hygiene, get to bed on time, and don't watch rated R movies?

rebecca95, unfortunately, we still have to try our best to determine who is the least bad and choose one. I wish there was a candidate I could wholeheartedly endorse. I would choose the one who is in bed with business/developers over the one who is in bed with unions - I believe in good business, but I don't believe in unions, whether they are good or bad. With regard to broadcasters and media, they seem to always omit key little facts depending on which way the particular network leans. We must do homework.

I had hoped that Faulconer would win the majority and we could avoid a runoff, but there is still some hope for him given that voters are left with Alvarez as their alternative. I think it would have been equally good for republicans had "flip flop" Fletcher made it to the runoff instead of Alvarez. Given how left leaning our beautiful (except for the roads) city is, Republicans are in a pretty good position now for the runoff, better than I had realistically expected. mySDvoice, I agree with you that many voters will be turned off by Alvarez' dependence on union money, and those who aren't, should be. Personally, the primary reason I was immediately repelled by Alvarez was his union support - whoever the unions like, I know I want nothing to do with.Peking_Duck_SD: "Mr. Alvarez, congratulations, you WILL be our next mayor!!" - If you are wrong you can count on me to come back and say "I told you so", so don't get all fussy if/when that happens :-)

The dictionary defines art as "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."

So, I'm having a hard time seeing how this $30,000 (OMGoodness) little string of white lights fits the definition. I make better "art" every year around the perimeter of my apartment balcony with my $10 strings of multi-colored, Walmart Christmas lights.

I laughed out loud when I realized that the lights are white specifically because they cannot be red, blue or green in that neighborhood. We are investing $30,000 into this dangerous little gang-infested area of the community because somehow art will make things better, yet at the same time, we are respecting the local street thugs code of honor by not using any of their colors? This is so silly. In all honesty, the only good I can imagine coming out of this art project is that perhaps the lights will be bright enough to deter crime a little. But I doubt it. The "art" will probably be destroyed by the gangs within six months, or spray painted over with red, blue or green translucent paint.

For what it's worth, I went to get a haircut at a barber shop very similar to this one (not this particular one, but another very near by) because I wanted to have a cultural experience. I barely got through the door and the barber yelled out to me "yo, I cain't cut yo hair". When I asked why not, he told me it's because I'm not black, and he doesn't know how to cut my hair. I think he just didn't like the way my hair was styled with mousse.

Lastly, my two cents - Zimmerman was acquitted and Trayvon looked like the scary kids that used to bully me in school. Not much to argue about.

"The Children's Pool was deeded to the city in 1931 as a safe area for kids to swim."

That is the key point. How sad it is that someone had a good heart to leave something nice for the public, specifically for all the children of the future, only to have their gift stolen from the children and given to nuisance animals. What a tragedy.